The review concerns the strategies for identifying the causes of non-specific low back pains in order to facilitate adaptation of effective focused physical examination of the source of pain. The reason is the fact that back pain complaints are non-specific thus making low back differential diagnosis a complex procedure. The goal is to determine effective treatment of the lumbar spine, sacroiliac and hip joint complex, which practitioners have questioned for decades. This goal can be achieved by the physical examination of patients by clinicians so as to identify the cause as well as treatment of low back pain. The article also intends to presents answers to the complexities of treating the condition in addition to conceptualizing the correlation between specific diagnostic methods in patients. The primary issues under research regarding physical assessments and diagnosis is finding accurate diagnosis techniques for identifying the generators of lumbar spine, sacroiliac and hip joint complex in primary care (Wong & Johnson, 2012). The article also intends to explore ways of reducing sensitivity to pain during treatments.
Place New Order
The elements for review used in the article are clinical methods that assess the effectiveness of the diagnostic techniques that could facilitate treatment of lower back pain, which seem elusive for practitioners. The study also employs differential contractile tissue testing, which distinguishes the tissues involved, either non-contractile or contractile. Subsequently, the examination advances to checking the components that affect spinal cord functioning. The article correlates theory with practice for the identification of effective diagnostics for both nonspecific lower back pain and pain attributable to specific spinal causes. In the systematic study, the scholars test physical components, such as an ability to stand in a given position, to determine the effectiveness of the treatment methods for lumbar spine, sacroiliac and hip joint complex. Other physical components include squatting, which is used to reveal the dysfunctions of lower extremity as well as spine, and sitting, which is used to identify radiculopathy caused by disc herniation.
The results of the systematic review are valid because they affirm the significance of the use of effective methods for determining the causes of pain for both nonspecific back pain and pain associated with radiculopathy or other specific causes. Afterwards, the diagnosis dictate the preferred treatment of lumbar spine, sacroiliac and hip joint complex. The validity is confirmed because the article quantifies the findings using simple methods, such as physical examination of a patient as a sign of recovery from the spinal ailment (Airaksinen et.al, 2006). Additionally, the article refers to previous studies on similar topics, with is a commendable approach, according to Rados and Elezovic (2013) and their article.
The final results are that nonspecific low back pain contributes the highest number of visits to healthcare facilities in the quest for treatment for spinal related ailments. Consequently, diagnostic laboratory test alone is not efficient as the technique for examining lumbar spine, sacroiliac and hip joint complex. It was concluded that the identification of the condition is a complex process that requires a combination of techniques. However, the utilization of a wrong approach to imaging can result in the adaptation of ineffective intervention measures (Navarro-Zarza et al., 2012).
- Our custom writing services includes:
- Custom essay writing for the best grades;
- CV, resume and cover letters which would
make you successful
- Thesis and dissertations writing by academic
The mode of evaluation described in the article applies to nursing as a practice at different levels. For instance, a registered nurse can use the technique in the examination of the effectiveness of intervention strategies for solving spinal ailments (Kumar & Kumar, 2013). The testing proposed in the article can prove helpful in the elimination of practices that recommend the adoption of ineffective diagnostics for low back pain. A nurse can also employ the techniques proposed in the review for the assessments of conditions affecting patients in order to facilitate the adaptation of suitable magnetic resonance imaging guidelines.
Musculoskeletal Care funded the review for the analysis of conditions related to spinal disorders. One of the strengths of the article is that it acknowledges the need to integrate a combination of techniques in the diagnosis and treatment of spinal ailments. Consequently, the article focuses on the physical aspects of the majority of treatment methods in the healthcare facility. For that reason, one can conclude that the study focuses on the critical aspects of therapy that people overlook. Yet, they have immense impact on the outcome of treatment for the patients suffering from spinal cord related ailments. Another strength of the article is that it addresses the shortcomings of the use of medical imaging and diagnostic laboratory testing. Additionally, the point that the outcome of treatment depends on the finding of examination makes this written piece credible.
The weakness of the article is that the author concludes about the complexity of the use of diagnostic imaging in the identification of low back pain without presenting valid reasons for such assertions. Secondly, the study focuses on the utilization of such physical techniques as sitting and squatting as the remedies for spinal ailments. As a consequence, the study fails to acknowledge the significance of psychosocial factors, which do contribute to the selection of effective diagnostics of such diseases. In addition to overlooking the significance of the adaptation of diagnostic imaging, the study uses findings that are more than one decade old. This choice can be an indication that the study is obsolete. In a scientific test, such outdated information could be misleading, since the dynamics of the contraction of ailments and technological advancement in treatment have changed drastically over the years. Lastly, the article does not present any tangible evidence affirming the relation between lower back pain and sacroiliac joint disorders.
Despite its shortcomings, the article has accomplished its objective of sensitizing practitioners on the suitable ways of dealing with lumbar spine, sacroiliac and hip joint complex ailments. For instance, it proposes a selective screening test for the identification of lower back pain as opposed to relying on the evaluation of psychosocial factors. The study has also managed to presents new findings outlining the shortcoming of overreliance on the MRI screening in the diagnosis of ailments. The information presented in this study also adds to the existing knowledge about the ways for dealing with lumbar spine, sacroiliac and hip joint complex ailments.
All in all, this research review can help formulate effective strategies for conducting examinations without incurring unnecessary costs involved in expensive and ineffective methods. Additionally, an Advanced Practice Registered Nurse (APRN) can utilize the proposed concepts when designing diagnosis for the intervention of lumbar spine, sacroiliac, and hip joint complex. The findings of this study can also help distinguish the diagnostics for back pains attributable to different causes. The clinical outcomes can help the physicians to offer effective treatment to the patient, since it is carried out through the efficient identification of soft tissue, articular, lumbar spine dysfunction, nerve related pain, hip joints as well as sacroiliac. The findings may also be of assistance when determining the appropriate care methods for patients with non-specific lower back pain.